• Biblical Families is not a dating website. It is a forum to discuss issues relating to marriage and the Bible, and to offer guidance and support, not to find a wife. Click here for more information.

Shooting in New Zealand

He's been all over the world so has no doubt had many different opportunities to learn. Also, some gun clubs certainly get up to "shoot and move" type activities as a form of competition, so it's plausible to gain at least some of those skills in that way. I've heard other commentators claim that he was proficient with his guns but by no means an expert, and would have moved through the building quite differently if he'd had special forces training or anything like that. But I don't know myself.
 
FollowingHim said:
He's been all over the world so has no doubt had many different opportunities to learn. Also, some gun clubs certainly get up to "shoot and move" type activities as a form of competition, so it's plausible to gain at least some of those skills in that way. I've heard other commentators claim that he was proficient with his guns but by no means an expert, and would have moved through the building quite differently if he'd had special forces training or anything like that. But I don't know myself.
Click to expand...

Does New Zealand have/allow paintball? Some, and I mean, some proficiency can be gained that way, but I'm with @ZecAustin those skills require constant honing.
 
FollowingHim said:
You do need to bear in mind that in New Zealand nobody is armed in general life (those who have guns just keep them locked in safes at home), so opposition will be even less than in the USA or in less policed countries such as Africa / Middle East, and kill ratios may be higher as a result.
Click to expand...

Rarely are these mass shootings occurring in places where people are armed. If they did, you wouldn't hear about them as they'd come to a swift end and the media hate hate hates to highlight any positive example of self defense. And besides these weren't fainting flowers, one of those mosques turned out at least a couple of terrorists which were later killed overseas in drone strikes.

Let me give one example... the Paris theater attack was a venue with 1500 people; 3 men with automatic rifles managed to only kill 90. At 30 each but thats almost half as many per man and in a more target rich environment with likely fewer uncovered exits. 49 of 300 is 9.8%. The theater shooting was only 6% with better weapons and more help.

Let me give a more recent example. Here are the month to date 'terrorist' attacks.

NZ was the largest attack by over twice as much. This despite several of the others being carried out by fire teams or entire squads of men. It was more deadly than attacks perpetrated by actual professional soldiers trained by foreign militaries/intelligence agencies.

It was also probably the only one you heard about. And it was the only 'right wing' attack. Apparently the media only cares about those.
 
Latest development is that the government is moving forwards with restrictions on semiautomatic firearms. The details are however very confusing at present, and the reality is very different to the media headlines.
At this stage, nothing has been banned (despite all the headlines saying "NZ bans assault rifles" etc).
What has happened, is that where you used to have a special licence (called an E category licence) to own any semiautomatic with a magazine capacity > 7 rounds, you now need this special licence endorsement to own any semiautomatic that could theoretically be fitted with a large magazine even if it does not currently have one.
In practical terms, you used to be able to buy an AR-15 on a normal gun licence, now you need a special endorsement to buy one.
But although that's a really big practical change for many gun owners, as many popular guns are suddenly not legal for people to keep on their current licences, it's still not technically a ban. It's just a change of definitions within existing laws.
The government is promising to ban semiautomatics in some form, and that would take new legislation, which will need to be debated. So the next few weeks will be interesting as we see how much further they'll go.

They've also announced that they will do a buyback for any guns that people cannot keep under their current licences, but details will follow on how that will work.
Incidentally the police are saying that although the government is encouraging people to hand in their guns, and a handful of people have done so already for emotional reasons (or to make headlines), please don't yet as they're not ready for them! Just tell them you've got one to hand in and they'll ask for it when they're ready, once they've figured out how they're going to handle this logistical nightmare the government has suddenly thrust upon them...

What the government isn't doing is anything that would actually address the problem. This is just an excuse to bring in gun control measures that have been talked about in certain circles for years anyway, and do it fast while people are still emotional enough to accept it with little resistance. It's got nothing to do with actually stopping terrorism or gun crime, every serious thinker or reader of history knows it won't do anything positive, but there will be a lot of votes in it.
 
Don't judge this by American standards, we're coming from a completely different starting point here. You're dealing with background checks, standdown periods, gun registration etc being brought in in different places to different levels. Over here, the licencing system makes it all really simple - you get checked once that you're not obviously mentally unstable, then you can buy as many guns as you like. Yes, it has flaws, but let's not have a big long debate about that. I'm just trying to keep you all up to speed with what's actually going on.
 
The most serious issue is that the media and society as a whole is going on an absolute witchhunt against anybody who has ever said anything negative about Muslims. A large and growing number of people have lost their jobs, from many different employers, because of comments they made on Facebook, sometimes comments made many years ago. Jordon Petersen's books have been pulled from a major national bookseller, not because of his own words, but because he once posed for a photo with a fan wearing a t-shirt saying "I'm a proud Islamophobe" - guilt by association.

This is actually really serious for anyone like myself who comments on such issues online. This has far more serious short-term implications than any gun law changes. It can completely ruin your life and the lives of your family in an instant, while gun laws in the short term just affect precisely what types of firearm are allowed in your gun cabinet.

It's an old-fashioned witchhunt. If you look at more articles on that website you'll learn more of what's happening also.

And today, a week after the shooting, normally we'd have a national two minutes of silence to remember the victims - that's what happened after the Christchurch earthquake that killed over 180 people.

But for this event, not only is there a 2-minute silence, but the Islamic call for prayer is being broadcast nationwide on radio and TV at 1:30pm today. The official memorial is a government-sponsored open-air Muslim religious service (see here for the details). And all women have been encouraged to wear a hijab or headscarf for the day - encouraged by the Prime Minister no less, who has been wearing a hijab in all public appearances I have seen since the shooting.

There is a sudden change of mood in the entire country, towards demonising anyone with concerns about Islam, however slight, and officially promoting Islam by the government itself. This is massive, and fast.
 
Correction: I believe after the earthquakes there was a one minutes silence, as there always is after deaths. Here the official commemoration doubles the usual silence. 2 minutes is traditionally only observed on the national war rememberance day in the Commonwealth, the day varying by country. So this appears to commemorate the victims as if they were military heros.
 
Hope so. The Gillette ad comes to mind....

In any event, whatever the MSM and the internet pundits do with it, there will certainly be a 'backlash'....
 
It is very over-the-top and there is already a backlash of sorts from individuals, but it's strongly subdued by the risk of being targetted yourselves. Public opinion is very firmly on the side of the government in most places.

Over and over anyone putting any sort of thought into it is having the following conversations, online and in person:

A: The shooter was a white supremacist
B: No he wasn't
A: Really, what makes you say that?
B: Because he said himself what he was thinking, in his manifesto, and he says he did this for completely different reasons
A: WHY WOULD YOU POISON YOUR MIND WITH THE WORDS OF A MURDERER! I haven't read that and I never will.

That's the attitude of our prime minister, the media, and as a result the attitude of almost the entire population - I know from my own personal conversations and observing those of others. Ignorance has suddenly become a virtue.

There will certainly be people willing to push back - but in an age when everyone who does will have their past scrutinised until one tiny thing they happened to say against Islam years ago can be dragged up and used to get them to lose their job, how many people will be bold enough to? Especially when so many of the population are emotive enough over this to act as an "informer" for your own good.

Mark 13:12: "Now the brother shall betray the brother to death, and the father the son; and children shall rise up against theirparents, and shall cause them to be put to death."

A strong pushback may never come.
 
Not lost on me that this is coming out of Christ Church.... recognize the prophetic undertones... exactly like the violent shaking a couple years ago...
 
FollowingHim said:
You're dealing with background checks, standdown periods, gun registration etc being brought in in different places to different levels.
Click to expand...

Not for private sales.

FollowingHim said:
Don't judge this by American standards,
Click to expand...

No, I'm not. That was a statement based in English common law. Ya'll probably forgot about that down there.

FollowingHim said:
There is a sudden change of mood in the entire country, towards demonising anyone with concerns about Islam, however slight, and officially promoting Islam by the government itself. This is massive, and fast.
Click to expand...

Yes that is the greater concern. They're bringing in your new masters.

FollowingHim said:
A strong pushback may never come.
Click to expand...

Well then your country is screwed. The lack of guts to defend your religion and your nation is your biggest problem (not you personally, New Zealanders generally).
 
I'm not getting into the fundamental philosophy behind gun laws @rockfox, because at a fundamental level we basically agree, but it would take a number of posts to get to that conclusion and it's not a direction I feel like spending time discussing right now. There are other more critical matters on my mind.

For one example of how this witchhunt is affecting individuals, a well known conservative commenter in the NZ political blogosphere goes by the name "MacDoctor". I've watched him write very sensible things for over a decade now on a range of forums. Now, someone's complained about his old comments and he's been stood down from his job. Just for expressing conservative opinions online.
 
FollowingHim said:
There's been a major shooting in Christchurch, New Zealand, where at least one gunman attacked two mosques and killed several people. Check the media for up-to-date details, e.g. here. We're ok, I've got family locked down in multiple locations as a precaution but they'll all be fine too.

What is very interesting is that a man who appears to be one of the shooters actually published a manifesto explaining why he did it, that is rapidly being removed from the internet. I have archived it as an attachment to this post, NOT to promote it in any way, but simply to aid understanding. This is a very nuanced event and will be greatly simplified by media and politicians.

Bear in mind that this manifesto may not be genuine, it could be an entire fabrication intended to deceive, so hold everything from it with caution. As usual in such events, initial eyewitness reports suggest multiple shooters, but this manifesto supports a "lone-wolf" narrative, so could easily be part of the intended narrative if there is anything deceptive going on. However, keeping that caution in mind, it's worth having a look at to see what the shooter (or his handlers) wanted us to think his motivations were.

Key points to note from this manifesto:
1) He deliberately intended to cause a reduction in gun rights in both the USA and New Zealand.

2) However the media portray him, he claims to
  • NOT be a conservative. Or a xenophobe, islamophobe, nazi, neo-nazi, homophobe or antisemite.
  • be BOTH left-wing and right-wing depending on the issue
  • be unsure if he is a Christian (ie he's an agnostic, and his parting words are "I will see you in Valhalla" so not at all Christian)
  • be a racist, facist, and ethno-nationalist (ie in favour of preserving white/European national/ethnic identity within traditionally white/European countries).
3) He claims to be an eco-terrorist. He's really concerned about climate change, thinks non-white people (including but not restricted to Muslims) are killing the planet, and wanted to kill some people with a high birth rate to save the planet.

4) He also wanted to take revenge on Muslims for terrorism in Europe and elsewhere over both the past few years and ancient history, and particularly for the rape of Western women, hence why he singled them out over other immigrant communities.

So it's a real mishmash of ideas. His blend of environmentalism and racial purity is not dissimilar to Hitler's views, but is strange to read in a modern context.

Just remember - whenever this is used as justification for taking away gun rights further, which it will be, argue that this is exactly what he wanted. To do that would be to follow the wishes of a terrorist. And for government to further the desires of a terrorist would be a great evil.
Click to expand...

Seems like another false flag for gun and other controls? We are used to them here.
Fear, reaction, desired synthesis or the dielectic principle. Beastie does not like people able to self defend or oppose tyrany. Time will tell.

I often wonder what areas of the planet have the most elavorate and convincing false flags. For that a lot of multi level coordination and control is needed. We had one that took 3000 and is still working ok. Now with better technology and central controls is more difficult to discern right?
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top